^'**«J^ 




Author . 



Title 



Imprint. 



]0 — 47372-2 0I»0 



SPEECH 



OP 



HON. THOMAS J. RUSK, OF TEXAS, 



ON THE 



1 BOUNDARIES OF TEXAS 



DELIVERED 



IN SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, FEBRUARY 27 AND 28, 1850. 



WASHINGTON: 

PRINTED AT THE CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE OFFICE. 

1850. 



THE BOUNDAUIES OF TEXAS. 



The Senate having resumed the consideration 
of the Compromise Resolutions offered by Mr. 
Clay, on the 25ih of January — 

Mr. RUSK said: 

Mr. President: I have stood ready ever since 
I have held a seat upon this floor, to vindicate the 
right of my State to the territory to the Rio Grande, 
and as far as the forty-second degree of north 
fatitude, which is the subject-matter of the third 
and fourth resolutions offered by the honorable 
Senator from Kentucky, [Mr. Clay.] No occa- 
sion has presented itself before now in which 
this matter could be investigated, and final action 
of an authoritative character take place. I was 
gratified, sir, that the distinguished Senator from 
Kentucky, who, I regret to perceive, is not in his 
place, should have brought forward these resolu- 
tions. There are, among these resolutions, sev- 
eral which cannot have my support, without 
important amendments; but the distinguished po- 
sition which their author occupies, and the condi- 
tion in which the country is placed at the present 
moment by sectional disputes, rendered his inter- 
ference peculiarly fortunate. Allow me, sir, here 
to remark, that the condition of things is much 
more serious than seems to be generally supposed, 
and [ regret to observe that, notwithstandmg the 
excitement on this subject, there exists a sort of 
apathy in regard to the consequences likely to en- 
sue. I was glad, therefore, that the honorable 
Senator from Kentucky lent the weight of his name 
to anything which might furnish a ground of discus- 
sion, and enable us to settle the difficulties that 
now agitate this country, and are rapidly bringing 
us to the verge of sectional strife. It is time, sir, 
that this should be done — that we should meet 
this question. It has been long enough a hobby 
upon which political partisans, destituteofany other 
merit, may ride into powe ■. It is due to the Union 
itself — it is due to that fraternal feeling which 
should exist all over this broad country — it is due 
to the East, to the West, to the North, and to the 
South — that we should march up like men, meet 
this question fully, and at once settle it, in accord- 
ance with the principles of the Constitution, and 
in the spirit in which that sacred instrument was 
framed. 

I shall proceed at present, sir, to the considera- 
tion of the third resolution of the honorable Senator 
from Kentucky, reserving what I may have to say 
upon other subjects until I shall have established 



the title — which I conceive to be indisputable — of 
Texas to all the territory as far as the Rio Grande. 
The honorable Senator's resolution proposes to 
curtail that territory; and so much has been said 
upon this point, that it is, perhaps, best for me to 
go back and trace it from the beginning. 

I find, sir, that in discussing the title, (which in 
fact has its origin in the Revolution of Texas,) 
here and elsewhere, the ancient limits of Texas, 
according to the geographical distinctions by which 
that country has been known, are constantly re- 
ferred to. If we go back, we shall find that Florida, 
including Texas, according to a map published by 
John Senex, in London, in 1710, was bounded on 
the east by the Atlantic ocean and South Carolina, 
on the south by the Gulf of Mexico, on the west 
by the Rio Grande and New Mexico, and on the 
north by the 38th degree of north latitude sepa- 
rating it from Canada, or New France. Accord- 
ing to an authority published in 1721, Louisiana 
was bounded on the east by Florida and South 
Carolina, by the Gulf of Mexico on the south, by 
the Rio Grande and New Mexico on the west, 
and by Canada, or New France, on the north. 
These, sir, were the original boundaries. But 
here let me draw the attention of the Senate for a 
tnoment to an extract (which I will ask the Clerk 
to read) from an eloquent speech, on this very 
subject, delivered by the honorable Senator from 
Kentucky in 1820. 

The Secretary read the extract as follows : 
"The iiecoMdres(ilutioiicniii;)relifii(1ed three propositions — 
the tirgt of wliich whs, that the eqiiivHieiit granted by Spain 
to the United States for the province of Texas, was inade- 
quate. To deltrniine this, it was necessary to estimate the 
value of what we jjave and of what we received. Tiiis in- 
volved an inquiry into our claim to Texas. It was not his 
purpose to enter at large into this subject. He presumed 
the spectacle would not he presented ot questioning, in this 
branch of the Government, our title to Texas, which had 
been constantly maintained by the Executive for more than 
fifteen years past, under three several Administrations. He 
was, at the same time, ready and prepared to mal«e out our 
title, if any one in the House were tearless enough to con- 
trovert it. He would, for the present, briefly state, thai tlie 
man who is most fannliar with the transactions of this Gov- 
ernment— who largely partic ipated in the formation of our 
Constitution, and all that has been done under it — who, be- 
sides the eminent services that he has rendered his country, 
principally contributed to the acquisition of Louisiana — who 
must be supposed, from his various opportunities, best lo 
know its limits — declared, fifteen years ago, that our title to 
the II io del Norte was as well founded as it was to the island 
of New Orleans. (Here Mr. C. read an extract from a me- 
moir presented, in 1805, by Mr. Monroe and Mr. Pinckney, 
to Mr. Cevallos, proving that the boundary of Louisiana 
extended eastward to the^ Perdido, and westward to the Rio 



Del Norte, in which they say: 'The facts and principles 
wliich justify this eoriclu>i ri, iire so satisfactory to their Gov- 
ernment, as to convince it that the United States have not a 
better right to the island of New Orleans, under the cession 
referred to, than they have to the whole district of territory 
thus described.') The title to the Perdido on the one side, 
and to the Rio del Norte on the other, tested on the same 
principle — the priority of discovery, and of occupation by 
France. Spain hail tirst discovered and made an establish- 
ment at Pensacola — France at Dauphine island, in the bay 
of Mobile. The intermediate ?pace was unoccupied ; and 
the principle observed among European nations liavinj; con- 
tiguous settlements, being that the unoccupied space be- 
tween them slmuld be equally divided, was applifd to it, 
and the Perdido thus became the common boundary. So, 
west of the iMis.-issippi, La Salle, acting under France, in 
1683 or 1683, first discovered that river. In 1685 he made an 
establishment on the Hay of St. Bernard, west of the Colo- 
rado, emptying into it. The nearest Spanish settlement 
was Panuco, and the Rio del Norte, about the /nidway line, 
became the common boundary. 

"All the accounts concurred in representing Texas to be 
extremely valuable. Its superlicial extent was three or 
four times greater than ihat of Florida. The climate was 
delicious, the soil fertile, the margins of the rivers abound- 
ing in live oak, and the country admitting of easy settle- 
ment. It possessed, moreover, if he were not niisinformed, 
one of the finest ports on the Gulf of Mexico. The pro- 
ductions of which it was capable, were suited to out wants. 
The unfortunate captive of St. Helena wished for ships, 
commerce, and colonies. We have them all, if we do not 
wantonly throw them away. The colonies of other cinjn- 
tries are separated from them by vast seas, requiring great 
expense to protect them, and are held subject to constant 
risk of their being lorn from their grasp. > ur colonies, (m 
the contrary, are united to, and form a part, of our conti- 
nent ; and the same Mississippi, from whose rich deposit 
the best of them (Louisiana) has been formed, will trans- 
port on her bosom the brave, the patriotic men from her 
tributary streams, to defend and preserve the next most val- 
uable — the province of Texas." 

The title of Texas, Mr. President, is derived, 
as I have already said, not fronn geographical dis- 
tinctions, but from the revolution. No one will 
dispute that a war between two nations unsettles 
all boundaries. In such cases, they are to be es- 
tablished either by the sword or by treaty. 

It is well known that, in the year 1835, war 
broke out between Texas and Mexico. In that 
war, before the final Declaration of Independence, 
a battle took place between the Texan and Mexi- 
can armies at Ssn Antonio, in which the Texan 
troops were successful. General Cos, the com- 
mander of the Mexicans, entered into a capitula- 
tion, and abandoned the country with his forces; 
and thus early did Texas make her mark, and as- 
sert her claim to the territory as far as the Rio del 
Norte; and, in so doinjj, I think she acted wisely 
in taking a hint from the speech of the honorable 
Senator from Kentucky. 

I now send to the Secretary's desk the capitu- 
lation which took place on the occasion referred 
to, which he will be pleased to read. 

The Secretary reacj the capitulation, as follows: 

Capitulations enlcreiHuto by Gcnerul M<ntin Perjcdode Cos, 
of the permancid troops, aiut Gimcral Edward Burleson, of 
the colonial troops of Texas, 

Being desirous of preventing the farther effusion of blood 
and the ravages of civil war, we have agreed on the follow- 
ing stipulations : 

1. That General Cos and his officers retire, with their 
arms and private property, into the interior of the Republic, 
under parole of honor, that they will not, in any way, op- 
pose the reestablishment of the Federal Constitution of 
lb24. 

2. That the one hundred infantry l;Uely arrived, with the 
onnvicts— the remnant of the baitaliim of' Morelos— and the 
cavalry, retire with the General, taking their arms, and ten 
rounds of cartridges for their muskets. 

3. That the General take the convicts brought in by Col- 
onel Ugartachea, beyond the Rio Grandcs 

4. That it is discretionary with the troops, to follow their 
General, remain, or go to such point as they may deem 



proper; but in case they should all, or any of them, separ- 
ate, they are to have their arms, &,c. 

5. That all the public property, money, arms, and muni- 
tions of war, be inventoried, and delivered to G neral Bur- 
leson. 

6. That all private property be restored to its proper own- 
ers. 

7. That three officers of each army be appointed, to make 
out the inventory, anfl see that the terms of the capitulation 
are carried into effect. 

8. That three officers, on the part of General Cos, remain 
for the [lurpo.^e of delivering over the said property, stores, 
&c. 

9. That General Cos, with his force, for the present, oc- 
cupy the Alamo; and General Burleson, w,th his force, lo 
occupy the town of Bexar; and that the soldiers of neither 
party pass to the other armed. 

10. General Cos shall, within six days from the date here- 
of, remove his force from the garrison he now occupits. 

11. In addition to the arms before mentioned, General 
Cos shall be permitted to take, with his for. e,a four-pound- 
er, and fen rounds uf powder and ball. 

12. The officers appointed to make the inventory and de- 
livery of the stores, &c., shall enter upon the duties to 
which they have been appointed forthwith. 

1.3. The citizens shall be protected in their persons and 
property. 

14. General Burleson will furnish General Cos with such 
provisions as can be obtained, necessary lor his troops to 
teach the Rio Grande, at the ordinary price of the country. 

15. the sick anil wounded of General Cos's army, together 
with a surgeon and attendants, are permitted to remain. 

16. No person, either citizen or soldier, to be iimlested on 
account of his political opinions hitherto expressed. 

17. That duplicates of this capitulation be made out in 
Castilian and English, and signed by the commissioners ap- 
pointed, and ratified by the commanders of both armies. 

18. Tlie prisoners of both armies ap to this day, shall be 
put at liberty. 

The commissioners, Jos^ Juan Sanchez, adjutant inspect- 
or^Don Ramon Musquiz; and Lieutenant Francisco Rada. 
and interpreter Don Miguel Arciniega, appointed by the com- 
mandant and Inspector general Martin Perfecio de Cos, in 
connection with Colonel F. W. Johnson, Major R. C. Morris, 
and Captain J. G. Swisher, and interpreter John Cameron, 
appointed on the part of General Edward Burleson, alter a 
long and serious discussion, adopted the eighteen preceding 
articles, reserving their ratification by the Generals of both 
armies. 

In virtue of which, we have signed this instrument, in 
the city of Bexar, on the lllh of Decendier, 1835. 
JOSE JUAN SANCHEZ, 
RAMON MUSaUiZ, 
J. FRANCISCO DE RADA, 
MIGUEL ARCINIEGA, iiUenireter, 
F. W. JOHNSON, 
ROBERT C. MORRIS, 
JAMES G SWISHER, 
JOHN CAMERON, interpreter, 
I consent, and will observe the above articles. 

MARTIN PERFECTO DE COS, 
Ratified and approved: EDWARD BURI,ESON, 

Commander in-chief of the rohmleer army. 
A true copy: EDWARD BURLESON, 

Covimandcr-in-chief. 

This capitulation, Mr. President, is the first link 
in the chain of title which Texas sets up to the 
territory as far as the Rio Grande. Immediately 
after this capitulation, in the early part of 1836, the 
Declaration of Independence was made by Texas, 
and Santa Anna mustered his whole force for the 
purpose of exterminating us, and making the Sa- 
bine the boundary-line between Mexico and the 
United States. On the 21st of April of that year, 
the two armies encountered each other. The result 
is known — Santa Anna and some eight hundred of 
his troops, after the battle, remained our prisoners. 
He was, asa matter of course, anxious to obtain his 
liberty; but there were various other things which 
he was also anxious to obtain. He had shortly 
before overthrown the Constitution of 1824 of the 
Federal Government of Mexico, and established a 
Central Power, which had vested in him absolute 
authority. The Government, thus established^ 



was highly objectionable to the people of Mexico, 
and depended for its existence solely on the military 
power of the country. Santa Anna had brought 
that power to Texas. He was a prisoner, and the 
army, as well as the Government which depended 
upon it, was at our mercy. 

Under these circumstances, the first thin^ which 
he did, was to make a proposition to acknowledge 
the independence of Texas, and establish the Rio 
Grande as the boundary between the two countries. 
This was declined, and he re-urged it. The Mexi- 
can army commenced falling back in great confu- 
sion, while ours advanced. Santa Anna was left 
as a prisoner in the possession of the Government 
of Texas; and after repeated solicitations on his 
part, the Government, in May afterward, entered 
into a treaty with him, in which the independence 
of Texas was acknowledged, and the Rio Grande 
recognized as the boundary. I hold in my hand a 
copy of that treaty, which 1 will read. 

Jirtiflei of a:^ecme7it ami solemn compact, made and adopted 
61/ DxviD G. Bdrnet, President of the Republic of Texas, 
and the umlenisned, mrmhcrs of the Cabinet thereof, on the 
one part, and Don Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna, Pres- 
ident of the Republic of Mexico, and Don Vicente Fili- 
soLA, General of Djiisions, Don Jose Urea, Don Joa- 
quin Ramires y Sesma, and Don Antonio Gaona, Gen- 
erals of Brigades of the Armies of Mexico. 
Whereas, the President, Saiit.i Anna, wilh divers officers 
of his late iirmy, is a prisoner of war in charge of the army 
of Texas, and is desirous of terminating the contest now ex- 
isting between the Government of Texas, and that of Mexi- 
co, in vv/iich desire the Generals above-named do fully con- 
cur; and 

Whereas, the President of the Republic of Texas, and the 
Cabinet, are also willing to stay the farther eftusion of blood, 
and to see the two neighboring Republics placed in relations 
of friendship, and on Terms of reciprocal advantage : 

Tiierefore, it is agreed by the President Santa Anna, and 
Uie Generals Don Vicente Filisola, Don Jos^ Urea, Don Joa- 
quin Ramires y Sesma, and Don Antonio Gaona, 

1st. That the armies of Mexico shall, with all practicable 
expedition, evacuate the territory of Texas, and retire to 
Monterey, beyond the Rio Grande. 

2(1. That the armies, in their retreat, shall abstain from all 
pillage and devastation, and shall not molest any of the citi- 
zens of Texas, and shall not carry with them any cattle or 
other stock, more than may be absolutely necessary for their 
subsistence, for which a just price shall be paid. That all 
private property that may have been captured by either de- 
tachment of the army shall be deposited, at the tirst conve- 
nieiil point of their inarch, nnd left under a sutlicient guard, 
until the proper authorities of Texas shall take possession 
thereof. 

3il. That the aimy of Texas are to march westwardly,and 
to occupy such posts as the commanding general may think 
proper, on the east side of the Rio Grande, or Rio Bravo del 
Norte. 

4th. That the PresHent Santa Anna, in his official char- 
acter as chief of the Mi'xican nation, and t e Generals Don 
Vicente Filisola, Don Jos<< Urea, Don Joaquin Ramires y 
Sesma, and Don Ant 'iiio Gaona, as chiefs of armies, do 
-solemnly acknowledge, sanction, and ratify the full, entire, 
an I perlecl independence of the Republic of Texa-, with 
such boundaries as aie herealterset forth and agreed upon 
for the same. And they do solemnly and respectively 
pledge themselves, with all their personal and official attri- 
butes, to procure, without delay, the final and complete ratifi- 
cati<in an 1 confirmation of this agreement, and all the parts 
thereof, by the properand legitimate Government of Mexico, 
by the incorporation of the same into a solem and perpet- 
ual treaty of amity and commerce, to be negotiated with 
that Government, at the city of Mexico, by m nisters plen- 
ipotentiary, to be deputed by the Government of Texas for 
this hiijii purpose. 

.'Sill. That the following be, and the same are, herpby 
established and made the lines of dennircation between the 
two Republics of Mexico and of T-^xas, to wit : The line 
shall commence at the estuary or mouth of the Rio Grande, 
on the western bank thereof, and shall pursue the same 
bank up ihe said river, to the point where the river assumes 
the innie of the Rio Bravo del Norte, from which point it 
fhull proceed on (he said western bank to the head waters 
or source of said river; it being understood that llie terms 



Rio Grande and Rio Bravo del Norte apply to, and designate, 
one and the same stream. From the source of said river, 
the principal head branch being taken to ascertain that 
souri e, a due north line shall be run, until it shall intersect 
the boundary line established and described in the treaty 
negotiated by, and between, the Government ofSpain and the 
Government of the United States of the North ; which line 
was subsequently transferred lo, and adopted in, the treaty of 
limits made between the Governiiientof Mexico and that of 
the United States; and from this point of intersection the 
line shall be the same as was made and established in, and 
by, the several treaties above mentioned, lo continue to the 
mouih or outlet of the Sabine river, and from thence to the 
Gulf of Mexico. 

6th. That all prisoners taken by the forces of Mexico, be 
forthwith released, and be furnished w th free passports to 
return to their homes ; their clothing and small arms to he 
restored to them. 

7th. That all the fortresses of Texas be forthwith re 
stored without dilapidation, and wilh all the artillery and 
munitions of war beloniring to them respeciively. 

8tii. The President arid Cabinet of the Republic of Texas, 
exercising the high powers confided to them, by the people 
of Texas, do, for, and in consideration of the foregoing stip- 
ulations, solemnly engage to refrain from taking the life of 
the President Santa Anna, and of the several olficers of his 
late army, whom the events of war have made prisoners in 
their hands, and to liberate the President Santa Anna, with 
his [irivate Secretary, an 1 cause him to he conveyed, in one 
of the national vessels of Texas, to Vera Cruz, in order that 
he may more promptly and etiectually obtain the ratification 
of this compact, and the net'otiatinn of the definitive treaty 
herein contemplated by the Government of Mexico, with the 
Government of Texas. 

9tli. The release of the President Santa Anna, shall be 
made immediately on receiving the sianatures of the Gen- 
erals, Don Vicente Filisola, Don Jos^ Urea, Don Joaquin 
Ramires y Sesma, and Don Antonio Gaona, to this agree- 
ment, and his conveyance to Vera Cruz as soon afterward 
as may be convenient. 

10th. The Presidi nt, Santa Anna, and the Generals, Don 
Vicente Filisola, Don Jos^ Urea, Don Joaquin Ramires y 
Sesma, and Don Antonio Gaona, do, by this act of subscrib- 
ing this instrument, severally and solemnly pledge them- 
selves, on their inviolable parole of honor, that, in the event 
the Mexican Government shall refuse or omit to execute, 
ratify, confirm, and perfect this agreement, they will not, on 
any occasion whatever, take up arms against the people of 
Texas, or any portion of them, but will consider themselves 
bound, by every sacred obligation, to abstain from all hostil- 
ity towards Texas or its citizens. 

llth. That the other Mexican officers, prisoners with the 
Government of Texas, shall remain in custody, as hostages, 
for the faithful performance of this agreement, and shall be 
treated wilh humanity, and the respect due their rank and 
condition, until the final disposi ion of the Mexican Govern- 
nien- be ascertained, and a treaty, to be predicated upon the 
above stipulations, shall be made or rejected by that Govern- 
ment. In the event of a refusal to enter into, and ratify 
such t eaty, on the part of the Mexican Government, the 
Government of 'i'exas reserves to itself the right lo dispose 
of them as they may think proper and equitable, relative to 
the conduct of the Mexican forces towards the volunteers 
and soldie s of Texas, who have heretofore fallen into their 
hands. 

12th. The high contracting parties mutually agree to re- 
fer the treaty intended to be executed and solemnized by 
the two Governments of Texas and Mexico, on the basis 
established in this compact, to the Govetnnient of the Uni- 
ted Slates of the North, and to solicit the gu.Tranty of that 
Goveininent for the fulfillnunt, by the contracting parties 
respectivf-lv, of their several enijauement-- ; the s id parties 
pledging themselves, in case of any disagreement or defal- 
cation. 10 submit all matters in controversy to the final de- 
cision and Hdjustmenl of that Givernment. For this pur- 
pose, the contrai-Iing parties shall, as soon as practicable 
after the ratification of said treaty, depute one or more com- 
missioners to the court of VVa<hiiiston, invested with ple- 
nary powers lo perfect the object of this stipulation. 

13th. Any act of hostility on the part of the retreating 
Mexican troops, or any depredat on upon public or private 
propeiiy cornmiiied bv'lhose troops, or any iinperiinient pre- 
sented to the occupation of .iny part of the territory of Texas, 
by the forces thereof, on Ihe part of the N'exican troops, 
sh 'II be considered a violation of this agreement. 

Santa Anna was not alone in the execution of 
this treaty. General Filisola was the second in 
command, and was some forty or fifty miles off, 
with a large body of the Mexican army, at the 



6 



time that Santa Anna was made a prisoner. The 
treaty was begun as between General Santa Arnia 
and the Mexican generals on the one part, and 
the government of Texas on the other. Il ji;oes 
on in the names of General Santa Anna and half 
a dozen other generals, among them General Fili- 
sola, who had succeeded to the entiie command of 
the Mexican army tlien in Texas. This treaty 
was immediately communicated to General Fili- 
sola, and by him sanctioned; and under its pro- 
visions about five or six thousand Mexican troops, 
with their munitions of war, were saved. Allow 
me, sir, in proof of this, and to show that the 
Mexican Government also sanctioned this treaty, 
to lead an extract from a communication: 
From, the Secretary of War of Mexico, dated May l.'i, 1836, and 
aduresscd to General Filisola, then second in commaiid. 
"Secretary's Office of War and Marine, 
" Central Section, 1st Bureau, May 15, 1836. 

" Excellent Sir : With the most profnund sorrow, his ex- 
cellency tlie President pro /e7n. has leariifd, by the official 
letter of your excellency ol' the 25th of last month, the ileffat 
8uft" red on the 21st of the same month by the division coin- 
mand(;d in person by the Pifsideni, General-in-cliief of the 
army, (Santa Anna,) and tin: very lumentalile mi-fortune 
th.it his excellency should be made prironcr with other 
chiers and officers. 

"His excellency the President pro tcmAs in some measure 
consoled, that a general so experienced as your excellency, 
should be the one who obtains the commaiid, the which he 
expressly confirms. 

The first desire that his 'xcellencyhas is, that you address 
the enemy's General, exHcting from him, by Aecorows means, 
the lilierly of the Pnsident, G neral-iii-cl:ief, or at least, 
durins the time this point can be regulated, the con>id ra- 
tion due his high dignity, and to a person so di-tiniiuishid in 
the annals of American I'istoiy. and for whose preservation 
the entire nation is interested by gratitude, and because he 
IS chief of it. 

" His excellency the President jiro tem. counts upon you' 
excellency's directins all hU efforts to saving the remainder 
of the army, by concentrating it, so as to rt nder it more re- 
spectable, placing it in a coKvenient place for receiving 
provisions, (or which the most eflicacioiis measures are 
adopted. The preservation of Bexar is of absolute neces- 
sity, in Older that the Government, according to circumstan- 
ces, may act as they see fit. 

"The fate of all the prisoners is very interesting to the 
nation; and it is recommended to your excellency to en- 
deavor to alleviaie it, giving authority from this moment to j 
propose exchanges, and to preserve for this purpose, and 
because humanity exacts it, the lives of the prisoners made, j 
and that may be made, from the enemy. Your excellency j 
knows the circumstances which may resu t from an impru- 
dence committed in this affair; but the Government fears 
nothing as regards this, because it knows how great is the ! 
skill and zeal of your excellency for the best service of the 
country." 

General Filisola obeyed the directions here 
given him by the Secretary of War; he saved the | 
hfe of the President, some eight hundred prisoners, 
and, what was of still greater consequence to the 
Mexican Government, he saved the army upon 
which its very existence depended. All this was 
done by his sanctioning the treaty. Here is what 
he says on the subject at various times. In his 
defence, dated lOih of June, 1836, among other 
things, he said: 

" His excellency, [Santa Anna,] in my humble opinion, 
in the treaties he agreed upon, and that I had the honor to 
send your excellency, acted U'ith entire libcri), ami had 
nothing more in view than thi- interest of his country." 

In a previous dispatch to his Government, he 
says: 

" If the enemy, under these critical circuniatanres, should 
have met us on the only road that was left, nothing woulil 
remain but to die or surrender at disereiion. The army is 
without clothing, the arms ruined, anmiunition of every kind 
in a very bad condition, and horses ami mules badly used in 
the extreme. We have neither physician norapoihecaiy ; we 
are threatened with the epidemic of the season, added to the 



innumerable snflerings which the army has undergone; 
and should this misfortune take place, the men will perish 
vvitlniut the lea^t assistance, in the ii/idstofdifCouiagenieiit, 
and abandoned without even the consolation of spiiitual as- 
sistance; Jor uehave not a single chajikdn to say D'l.ssjcrvs. 
Cavalry sick, bagga};e, mules, everj thing that arcoiiipnnied 
the army, was a confused mass, without any d's'i'^f ''O" and 
without being able to move from the place where tlity were 
caught." 

In his dispatch of May 31, 1836, alluding to this 
treaty, General Filisola says: 

" r do not mention other reasons, perhaps more convinc- 
ing; and, in fine, 1 think I have saved the whole army fiom 
a disaster, and the national decorum fiom a positive dis- 
grace." 

This, then, sir, was the condition of General 
Filisola; this was the condition of the Mexican 
army, and a part of the terms of the treaty was 
the salvation of that army; the life of the Presi- 
dent was to be saved, and the prisoner.'^ we had in 
our camp were to be saved. These were the 
terms ; and the cimditions, being made known to 
General Filisola, were sanctioned by him, the 
Mexican Government directing him, and giving 
him full power and authority for these objects, and 
directing his attention to the accomplishmeni of 
them. He had no other means to accomplish 
them but to sanction this treaty. He did so, and 
transmitted it to his G.)vernnient. That Govern- 
inenl was mute until they had received all ilie ben- 
efits of the treaty. They had saved their army, 
they had saved the life of their President, and the 
prisoners who were in our camp. They had in 
fact received all the benefits intended to be secured 
to them; and never, until their army is safe upon 
the western bank of the Rio Gratide, do we hear a 
vi'ord about repudiation. And yet, under all these 
circumstances, we are flippantly told, it was a 
treaty made with prisoners, and therefore not 
bindmg. 

Now, sir, after receiving the benefit of the treaty, 
could Mexico, without national disgrace, repudiate 
that treaty ? Or can the Government of the United 
States avail itself of this quibble, and take half the 
territory of the State of Texas, under the sanction 
of an act of the Mexican Government, which was 
disgraceful in the eyes of the civilized world? If 
this were all — if we stopped here, can this Govern- 
ment, with due respect to its reputation, avail it- 
self of a iiiere quibble — a quibble which disgraced 
Mexico.' It seems to me, clearly not. Texas, in 
the year 1836, passed a law, defining her boundary 
according to this treaty, every article of which we 
had fully complied with, extending her limits lo 
the Rio Grande. Il is not worth while to take up 
the time of the Senate by reading that law. 

Mexico herself did not entirely disregard this 
treaty; for in the controversy which they still kept 
up with us, they always regarded the Rio Grande 
as the dividing line, and the question betvveen us 
never was debated as to the line of New Mexico 
or the Nueces; but it was " the whole or none — 
the Sabine or the Rio Grande " 

General Woll, who was in command of that 
division, on the 20th of June, 1844, issued a proc- 
lamation, in which are to be found these words: 

"20th June, 1844. 

"3. Every inilividunl who shall be found at the distance 
of one !eai;ne liom the left bank of the Rio Bravo, will be 
regarded as a favorer and aceompUce of the usurpers of 
that part of the national territory, and as a traitor to his 
country, and, i.fter a summary military trial, shall e pun- 
ished as such. ADRIAN WOLL., General of Lri»ade." 



Shortly after, the resolutions under which we 
were annexed, were presented to the State of Texas, 
for her consideration. A treaty was entered into 
by the then President of the Republic of Texas, 
Mr. Jones, and the Mexican Government. By the 
terms of that treaty, the independence of Texas 
was acknowledged, upon condition that she would 
annex herself to no other country, but leaving the 
question of boundary to be determined by an 
umpire. 

The Legislature of Texas unanimously, without 
a single dissenting voice, rejected that treaty. 

Then, sir, next in the history of this matter, 
comes our annexation; and here, Mr. President, 
allow me to read from the annexation resolutions: 

" Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
the United Slides of America in Congress assembled, That 
Congress doth cons(Mit that the territory properly included 
within, and rightfully belonging to, the Repuhlic of Texas, 
may be erected into a new State, to be c.illed the State of 
Texas, with a republican form of government, to be adopted 
by the people of said Republic, by deputies in convention 
assembled, with the consent of the existing government, in 
order that the same may be admitted as one of the States of 
this Union. 

" 2. Jlnd be it, further resolved, That the foregoing consent 
of Congress is given upon the following conditions, and 
with the following guaranties, to wit : First, said State to be 
formed subject to the adjustment by this government of all 
questions of boundary that may arise with other govern- 
ments ; and the constitution thereof, with the proper evi- 
dence of its adoption by the people of said Repuhlic of 
Texas, shall be transmitted to the President of the United 
States, to be laid before Congress for its final action, on or 
before the tirst day of January, one thousand eight hundred 
and forty-six. Second, said State, when ailmittel into the 
Union, after ceding to the United States all public edifices, 
fortifications, barracks, ports, and harbors, navy and navy 
yards, docks, magazines, arms, armaments, and all other 
property and means pertaining to the public defence, belong- 
ing to said Republic of Texas, shall retain all the public 
funds, debts, taxes, and dues of every kind, which may be- 
long to, or be due and owing said Republic; and shall also 
retain all the vacant and unappropriated lands lying within 
its limits, to be applied to the payment of the debts and liabil- 
ities of said Republic of Texas; and the residue of said lands, 
after discharging said debts and liabilities, to be disposed of 
as said State may direct ; but in no event are said debts and 
liabilities to become a charge upon the Government of the 
United States. Third, new Slates of convenient size, not ex- 
ceeding four in number, in addition to said Stale of Texas, 
and having sutlicient population, may hereafter, by the con- 
sent of said Slate, be formed out of the tcirritory thereof, 
which shall be entitled to admission under the provisions of 
the Federal Constitution. And such States as may be 
formed out of that portion of said territory lying south of 
thirty-six degress thirty minutes north latitude, commonly 
known as the Missouri compromise line, shall be admitteii 
into the Union with or without slavery, as the people of 
each State asking admission may desire. And in such State 
or States as shall bo formed out of said territory north of 
said Missouri compromise line, slavery or involuntary ser- 
vitude (except for crime) shall be prohibited." 

Under these resolutions, Texas agreed to submit 
all questions of boundary between her and other 
Governments, which evidently mean Mexico, to 
the Government of the United States. Now, does 
not everbody know that this matter could be set- 
tled in no other way than by the President and two 
thirds of the Senate, the treaty-making power.' 
Here, sir, is the compact; it is a plain one, offered 
to Texas on the one side by the United States, and 
accepted by her. It will not be contended that any 
other department of the Government, except the 
treaty-making power, has any jurisdiction of the 
question of the boundary. This is a hir2:e power, 
and may, in its exercise, involve the question of ex- 
istence itself. Has it ever been contended that such 
authority exists either in the Executive, in the Su- 
preme Court, or in any portion of the Government, 
except the treaty -making power.' Texas was not 



bargaining for any more difficulties than she had 
already on her hands. She was conceding to this 
Government the power of determining her bound- 
ary between her and Mexico; she was not trying to 
find another claimant to her soil. She was, by 
her own consent, willing to place them in the con- 
dition of judges. But, sir, the honorable Senator 
from Kentucky said, if I remember right, that if 
the United States was trustee for Texas, before 
she could claim this territory she must pay her 
portion of the expenses of the war. Now, sir, 
this would be introducing into our system of Gov- 
ernment an entirely new principle. You tie Texas 
hand and foot. She cannot defend her own terri- 
tory without your act; and yet, if a war grows 
out of defending that territory, she must pay a 
part of the expenses. Well, sir, be it so. She 
has paid a portion of those expenses; she has sur- 
rendered to you her nationality; she has given 
you jurisdiction to the Rio Grande; and, more than 
that, sir, in the war which followed, and for the 
expenses of which she is to be held responsible, 
she furnished you with more men to fight it than 
any other State of the Union, save and except her 
sister State, Louisiana. And is this to be counted 
for nothing.' Why, sir, take up the principle laid 
down by the honorable Senator from Kentucky: 
if it is to be applied to Texas, it ought to be ap- 
plied to all the other territory. You may possibly 
be able to settle the whole controversy on that 
principle, in proportion to the amount which each 
State is benefited by the war. In that proportion 
will each State have to bear the expenses; and 
what will be the result .' We have acquired 
much valuable territory, of which the non-slave- 
holding States have appropriated to themselves 
nearly the whole. Carry out this principle, and 
if they have to pay as much as is charged on Tex- 
as, it will amount to a round sum. This Govern- 
ment will make money enough to go on for years 
without a resort to taxation of any sort. But 
there is one thing certain: this Government agreed 
to become a judge in the controversy between 
Texas and Mexico, and we voluntarily submitted 
to it. The honorable Senator derives the power 
of this Government to settle the boundary in this 
way: He says that authority was vested by Texas 
in the Government of the United States to settle 
this controversy with Mexico ; that, having done 
so, this Government succeeds to all the claim 
which Mexico had ; that tlierefore the United 
States Government has a right to settle the contro- 
versy for itself. I ask, is this so? Is there any 
fair construction of the agreement between Texas 
and the United States which can give this Govern- 
ment the power to present in its own behalf the 
adverse claim of Mexico.' In fact, can the United 
States creditably, and with a due regard to its rep- 
utation for honor and justice, do so.' I object to 
the connection of the Texas boundary with the 
question of slavery, whether on the part of the 
North or the South. I appeal to something higher 
than mere considerations of party or sections in 
this matter. I am surrounded by honorable men, 
selected from their respective States, because of 
their high reputation, acting under the solemnity 
of an oath ; and I ask nothing from the feelings or 
prejudices of any particular Senator, but appeal 
solely to the ideas of strict justice implanted by the 
Creator in the mind of every man, to take this 
question before that tribunal, and settle it without 



8 



reference to the question of extension or non-ex- 
tension of slavery. And I think I have the right 
to make this appeal, so far as Texas is concerned; 
and I feel that I have the right to see it respected, 
for the reputation of this Government for justice, 
not to Sdy for magnanimity. No such power was 
granted to the United States by Texas, in relation 
to this boundary, as is claimed by the Senator. 

The honorable Senator from Kentucky, thought 
proper to say that the boundary was unfixed and 
unsettled, and that it was for us now to settle it. 
Now, I take issue with him here, and say that it 
is fixed and settled, and that this Government can- 
not unsettle it. Shortly after the annexation was 
consummated, as all well remember, Mr. Slidell 
was sent to Mexico by the President, to adjust this 
boundary difficulty between Texas and Mexico; 
and this, sir, was the first step taken for the pur- 
pose of adjusting these matters. Here allow me 
to read an extract from the instructions of the 
President, under which he went out: 
Mr. Buckanan's mstruetions to Mr. Slidell, dated November 
10, 1845. 

"This question of boundary may, therefore, be adjusted 
in such a manner between tlietwo Republics, as to cast tlie 
burden of the debt due to American claimant.-^, upon their 
own Government, while it will do no injury to Mexico. 

" In order to arrive at a just conclusion upon this subject, 
il is necessary, briefly to state what, at present, are the terri- 
torial rights of the parties. 

" The Congress of Texas, by the act of December 19, 
1833, have declared the Rio del Norte, from its mouth to its 
source, to be a boundary of that Republic. 

" In regard to the right of Texas to the boundary of 
Del Norte from its mouth to the Paso, there cannot, it is 
apprehended, be any very serious doubt. It would he easy 
to establish, by the authority of our most eminent statesmen 
— at a time, too, when the question of the boundary of the 
province of Louisiana was better understood than it is at 
present— that, to this extent, at least, Del Norte was its 
western limit. Messrs. Monroe and Pincknt- y, in their com- 
munications of January 28, 1805, to Don Pedro Cevallos, 
then the Spanish Minister of Foreign Relations, assert, in 
the strongest terms, that the boundaries of that province 
' are the river Perdido to the east, and the Rio Bravo to the 
west.' They say, ' The facts and principles which justify 
this conclusion, are so satisfactory to our Government, as to 
convince it that the United States have not a better right to 
the island of New Orleans, under the cession referred to, 
(that of Louisiana,) than they have to the whole district ol 
territory vvhicli is above described.' Mr. Jefferson was at 
that time President, and Mr. Malison Secretary uf State ; 
and you wi'll know how to appreciate their authority. In 
ttie subsequent negotiation with Mr. Cevallas, Messrs. Mon- 
roe and Pinckney com lusively vindicated the right of the 
United States as lar west as Del Norte. Down to the very 
conclusion of the Florida treaty, the United States asserted 
their right to tliis exti'nl,nothy words only, but by deeds. In 
1818, this Government, having learned that a numberof ad- 
venturers— chiefly Frenchmen — had landed at (Jalveston, 
with the avowed purpose of forming a settlement in ihal vi- 
cinity, despatched George Graham, esq, with instructions 
to warn them to desist. The follnwini is an extract from 
these instructions, dated June 2, 1818: 'The President 
'wishes you to proceed vvith all convenient speed to that 
'place, (Galveston,) unless, as it is not improbable, you 
'should, in the progress of the journey, learn that they 
» have abandoni-d or been driven from it. " Should they have 
• removed to Mataj^orda, or any other place north of the Rio 
< Bravo, and witliin the territory claimed hy the United 
' States, you will repair thither, without, however, exposing 
'yourself to be captured by any Spanish military force. 
' When arrived, you will, in a suitable manner, make 
'known to the chief, or leader of the expedition, your au- 
'thoriiy from the Government of the United States, and 
' express the surprise with which the President has seen 
' possession thus taken, without uthority from the United 
' States, o( a place within their territorial limits, and upon 
'which no lawful settlement can be made without their 
' sanction. You will call upon him explicitly to avow under 
' what national authority they profess to act, and take care 
'that due warning be eiven to the whole bodv, that the 
' place is within the United States, who will suffer no 



' permanent settlement to be made there under any author- 
' ity other than their own.' 

" It cannot be denied, however, that the Florida treaty, of 
February 22, 1819, ceded to Spain all that part of ancient 
Louisiana within the present limits of Texas; and the more 
important inquiry now is, what is the extent of the territo- 
rial rights, which Texas has acquired by the sword, in a right- 
eous resistance to Mexico.' In your negotiations with 
Mexico, the independence of Texas must be considered a 
settled fact, and is not to be called in question. 

" Texas achieved her independence on the plains of San 
Jacinto, in April, 1836, by one of the most decisive and 
memorable victories recorded in history. She then con- 
vinced the wiirld, by her courage and her conduc, that she 
deserved to rank as an independent nation. To use the 
language of Mr. Webster, Secretary of State, in a dispatch 
to (jur Minister at Mexico, dated 8th July, 1842: 'From 
'the time of the battle of San Jacinto, in April, 1836, to 
' the present moment, Texas had exhibited the same ex- 
' ternal signs of national independence as Mexico herself, 
'and with quite as much stability of government. Practi- 
' cally free and independent ; acknowledged as a political 
'sovereignty by the principal Powers of the world ; no hos- 
' tile foot finding rest within her territory for six or seven 
'years, and .Mexico herself refraining, for all that period, 
' from any farther attempt to reestablish her own authority 
' over that territory,' Slc., &c. 

" Finally, on the 29th March, 1845, Mexico consented, in 
the most solemn form, through the intervention of the Brit- 
ish and French Governments, to acknowledge the independ- 
ence of Texas, provided she would stipulate not to annex 
herself, or become subject, to any country whatever. 

" It may, however, be contended, on the part of Mexico, 
hat the Nueces, and not the Rio del Norte, is the true west- 
ern boundary of Texas. I need not furnish you arguments 
to controvert this position. You have been perfectly famil- 
iar with the subject, from the beginning, and know that the 
jurisdiction of Texas has been extended beyond that river, 
and that Representatives from the country between it and 
the Rio del Norte, have participated in the deliber.itions of 
both her Congress and her convention. Besides, this por- 
tion of the territory was embraced within the limits of an- 
cient Louisiana. " 

These, Mr. President, were the instructions 
under which Mr. Slidell went out to Mexico to 
settle the questions between Texas and Mexico. 
It is known that his mission failed. War upon 
this subject broke out between Mexico and the 
United States; and after it had been prosecuted for 
some time, another gentleman (Mr. Trist) was 
sent out for the purpose of negotiating this matter. 
His instructions were not only similar to those 
given to Mr. Slidell, but were accompanied by a 
map, (to which I shall have occasion hereafter to 
refer,) to act as a guide in any treaty he might 
make with Mexico. Pending the negotiation of 
Mr. Trist, it seems that he had somehow agreed 
to treat, leaving this Texas question unsettled un- 
til farther instructions from his Government. As 
soon as this information reached here, this is what 
was said to him by the Secretary of State: 
Mr. Buchanan to Mr. Trist. 
" Department of State, 

"Washington, October 6, 1847. 

" Sir : On the 2d instant, there was received at this de- 
partment, from Vera Cruz, a printed document in Spanish, 
consisting of eight quarto pages, and entitled 'Contestace 
oneshabedas entre el Supremo Gobierno Mexicano, el Gen- 
eral-en gefe del ejercito Americano, y el comisionado de los 
E-tados Unidos.' This purports to give a history, in detail, 
of the origin, progress, and unsuccessful termination of your 
negotiations vvith the Mexican commissioners. The coun- 
ter-projet of the Mexican Government is, indeed, under all 
the circumstances, ■ most extraordinary document. Its ex- 
travagance proves conclusively that they were insincere in 
appointing commissioners to treat for peace, and that the 
armistice and subsequentnegotiations were intended merely 
to gain time. They must have known that the Government 
of the United Stales never would surrender either the terri- 
tory between the Nueces and the Rio Grande, or New Mex- 
ico, or any portion of Upper California — never would in- 
demnify Mexican citizens for injuries they may have sus- 
tained by our troops in the prosecution of the present just 
and necessary war — and never could, without dishonor, 



suffer the Mexican Government to levy new duties upon 
goods imported into ports now in our actual possession, 
which had already paid duties to the United States. To 
propose such term-j, was a mere mockery. And here I ou^lit 
to observe, in justice to yourself, that we do not believe 
there is any truth in the assertion of the Mexicin coniinis- 
sioners, that you had proposed (if the other terms of the 
treaty were made satisfactory) to refer to your Government, 
' with some hope of a good result,' the question of surrend- 
ering to Mexico that portion of the sovereiijn State of Texas 
between the Nueces and the Rio Grande, or any part of 
Upper California." 

He was dismissed, and ordered home, because 
he even entertained proposals of that description. 
I will read, sir, an extract from a dispatch of 
Santa Anna, after the battle of Buena Vista, to 
show in what light he regarded this question. 
Under date of the 27 ih February, 1847, he writes 
to his Government: 

" From the impression we had made on the enemy, he 
did not appear before us for three days; the bearer of the 
flag, however, arrived witli a proposition IVom General Tay- 
lor, for an exchange of prisoners, and for our sending for the 
wounded, who had remained on the field. He also expressed 
to me the desire which the Americans felt for the reestab- 
lishment of peace. I replied— in order that he might say 
the same to his General— that we sustained the most sacred 
of causes — the defence of our territory, and the preseivation 
of our nationality and rights ; that we were not the aggres- 
sors, and that our Government had never offended that of 
the United States. I observed that we could say nothing of 
peace, while the Americans were on this side of the Bravo, 
or occupied any part of the Mexican territory, or blockaded 
our ports, and that we were resolved to perish, or vindicate 
our rights ; that fortunf, niiglit not always be favorable to the 
enemy; and the experience of the 22d and 23d, should con- 
vince them that it could change." 

From this it will be seen how Santa Anna him- 
self, pending these negotiations, and before any 
treaty was formed, regarded this matter. I will 
now show what was the opinion of the Mexican 
commissioners, even after the treaty was made. 
The.se commissioners, in a communication which 
they made to their Government, and which was 
published all over Mexico, declare that: 

" The intention of making the Bravo a limit, has been 
announced by the clearest signs for the last twelve years ; 
and it would have been impossible, at the present day, to 
change it. ^fter the defeat of San Jacinto, in ^pril, 1836, 
that was the territory which we stipulated to evacuate., and 
vjhich we accordin^li) ilid evacuate, by falling hack on Matamo- 
ros. In this place was afterward stationed what was called 
the Army of the North ; and though it is true that expedi- 
tions and incursions have been made there, even as far as 
Bexar, we have very soon retreated, leaving the interme- 
diate space absolutely free. In this state General 'I'aylor 
fouid it whi.'n, in the early part of last year, he entered there 
by order of his Government." 

This, sir, is sufficient to show in what estima- 
tion it was held there. Under this state of things, 
the Mexicans, after they had broken off this com- 
munication with Mr. Trist, again opened negoti- 
ations, and made the treaty, which is now the law 
of the land. Mr. Trist, in making this treaty, had 
the instructions of his Government in his hand, 
and it is idle to say for a single moment, that the 
question of the Texan boundary did not enter 
fully into that negotiation. It is charged now, 
and always has been, as the cause of the war. 

The establishment of the boundary of Texas was 
the object of this Government; it had formed the 
subject of instructions to both our commissioners, 
and a map had been furnished to Mr. Trist as a 
part of these instructions. That map I have be- 
fore me: here it is; and it shows that all of New 
Mexico is on the v/est side of the Rio Grande, and 
describes all east of it as Texas. Now, with the 
instructions to Mr. Slidell, in the first place, before 
him; with similar instructions also in his posses- 



sion; with this map, too, before him, distinctly 
designating all this territory east of the Rio 
Grande, up to the 42d parallel of north latitude, 
as being part of Texas; and with a letter in his 
pocket, dismissing him and ordering him home, 
because he even offered to leave anything about 
the Texas boundary open for further discussion — 
with all these evidences, is it not preposterous to 
say, that the question was not among the first 
which presented itself to the attention of the 
American commissioner in his negotiations.' What 
the Mexican commissioners say, is clearly evi- 
dence, that the question was so understood on 
their part. Under these circumstances, the treaty 
was negotiated; and it has also a direct reference 
to this map — it has, 1 repeat, a direct reference to 
this map, as follows: 

Fifth xdrticle of the Treaty with Mexico. 
"Art. V. The boundary line between the two Republics 
shall commence in the Gulf of Mexico, three leagues from 
land, opposite to the mouth ofnlie Rio Grande, otherwise 
called Rio Bravo del Norte, or opposite the mouth of its 
deepest branch, if it should have more than one branch emp- 
tying directly into the sea: from thence, up the middle of 
that river, following the deepest channel, where it has more 
than one, to the point where it strikes the southern boun- 
dary of New Mexico ; thence westwardly, along the whole 
southern boundary of New Mexico, (wliich runs north of 
the town called Paso,) to its western termination ; thence 
northward, along the western line of New Mexico, until it 
intersects the first branch of the river Gila ; (or if it should 
not intersect any branch of that river, then to the point on 
the said line nearest to such branch, and thence in a direct 
line to the same ; thence down the middle of the said branch 
and of the said river, until it empties into the Rio Colorado ; 
thence across the Rio Colorado, following the division line 
between Upper and Lower California, to the Pacific ocean. 

" The southern and western limits of New Mexico, men- 
tioned in this article, are those laid down in the map en- 
titled, ' Map of the United Mexican States, as organized and 
defined by various acts of the Congress of said Republic, and 
constructed according to the best authorities. Revised 
edition. Published at New York, in 1847, by J. Disturnell ;' 
of which map, a copy is added to this trea y, bearing the 
signatures and seals of the undersigned plenipotentiaries. 
And, in order to preclude all difficulty in tracing upon the 
ground the limit separating Upper from Lower California, it 
is agreed, that the said limit shall consist of a straight line 
drawn from the middle of the Rio Gila, where it unites with 
the Colorado, to a point on the coast of the Pacific ocean, 
distant one marine league due south of the souihernmof t 
point of the port of San Diego, according to the plan of said 
port, made in the year 1782, by Don Juan Pantoja, second 
sailing-master of the Spanish fleet, and published at Madrid, 
in the year 1802, in the atlas to the voyage of the schooners 
Sutit and Jlfeiiearirt— of which plan a copy is hereunto added, 
signed and sealed by the respective plenipotentiaries. 

" In order to designate the boundary line with due pre- 
cision, upon authoritative maps, and to establish upon the 
ground, land-marks, which shall show the limits of both Re- 
publics, as described in the present article, the two Govern- 
ments shall each appoint a commissioner and a surveyor, 
who, before the expiration of one year from the date of the 
exchange of ratifications of this treaty, shall meet at the port 
of San Diego, and proceed to run and mark the said bound- 
ary in its whole course to the mouth of the Kio Bravo del 
Norte. Tliey shall keep journals and make out plans of 
their operations; and the result agreed upon by them shall 
be deemed a part of this treaty, and shall have the same 
force as if it were inserted therein. The two Governments 
will amicably agree, regarding what may be necessary to 
these persons, and also as to their respective escorts, should 
such be necessary. 

" The boundary line established by this article, shall be 
religiously respected by each of the two Republics, and no 
change shall ever be made therein, except by the express 
and free con.-ent of both nations, lawfully given by the Gen- 
eral Government of each, in conformity with its own con- 
stitution." 

This map, thus referred to by its title, author, 
and date, was the one sent out and referred to in 
the instructions to Mr. Trist, who negotiated the 
treaty. Not only is it referred to by its caption; 



10 



but, sir, it is signed and sealed by the connmission- 
ers, on the part of both nations, and comes back 
here, part and parcel of the treaty. It came into 
this chamber as such, and every Senator who was 
here at the time, will recollect that we purchased 
a number of these maps, and that they were on 
every desk here during the discussion of this 
treaty; and I ask you, now, to show me a single 
foot or an acre of land which is laid dow'n on this 
map as New Mexico, east of the Rio Grande. 
And yet it seems all this amounts to nothing! 
This map, thus established, referred to, and made 
part of the treaty itself, and which was discussed 
here and ratified, as a part of that treaty, is to be 
arguedoutofit,andonehalf of her territory, accord- 
ing to that map, taken away from Texas. This 
may be accomplished: Texas has but a feeble ad- 
vocate, and she stands opposed by one of the most 
powerful names in the country — one whose very 
dictum is law, but if he does succeed in arguing 
this map out of the treaty, he will have accom- 
plished what oratory never did before, in my 
opinion, either in ancient or in modern times. 
Not only will it perpetrate a deep wrong upon the 
State which I, in part, represent, but it will ac- 
complish another thing: it will add a chapter to 
the history of this Government, which it will be 
hard to reconcile to our notions of magnanimity 
and justice. 

Sir, this question is now up, and it should be 
determined. It has been the fruitful theme for 
stump orators all over the United States, and the 
topic of discussion in this and the other branch of 
Congress, even when a post-office was to be estab- 
lished, or when anything in the slightest degree 
connected with Texas was under consideration. It 
is now again before the Senate, and 1 call upon 
Senators to determine this question. It is due to 
their own reputation, as well as to the State of 
Texas. Sir, she has nothing else with which to 
pay her just debts. This territory has cost her 
dearly, and, indeed, all her rights have cost her 
dearly. For the sake of those rights she, with less 
than 30,000 people, was bound to go to war with, 
and run the risk of extermination from, a nation of 
eight millions. Her sons went to the field of bat- 
tle, and her daughters had to leave their homes, 
and seek safety from a merciless enemy, and from 
the Indian tomahawk, this side of the Sabine. All 
these risks and dangers were incurred in defence 
of this boundary. Yes, sir; she stood by it then, 
and since she has been annexed, it has been fully 
respected by this Government — in proof of which, 
allow me to refer to President Polk's messao-e of 
24th July, 1848 : 

" Under the circumstancps existinc diirinj the pendpticy 
of the war, and while the whole of New Mexico, as^ claimed 
by our enemy, was in our military occupation, I was not un- 
mindful ot the rights of Texas to that portion whicli she 
claimed to he within her limits. In answer to a letter from 
the Governor of Texas, dated on the 4th of January, 1847, 
the Secretary of State, by my direction, informed him, in a 
lettet of 12ih February, 1847, that in the President's annual 
message of December, 1846, 'you have already perceived 
that New Mexico is at presentin the temporary occupation 
of the troops of the United States, and the government over 
it is military in its character. It is merely such a govern- 
ment as must exisi, under the laws of nations and of war, 
to preserve order and protect the rights of the inhahiianis, 
and will cease on the conclusion of a treaty of peace with 
Mexico. Nothing, tlieretbre, can he more certain than that 
this temporary government, resulting from necessity, can 
never injuriously affect the right wliich the President be- 
lieves to be justly asserted by Texa.- lo the whole territory 
on this side of the Rio Grande, whenever Uie Mexican 



claim to it shall have been extinguished by treaty. But this 
is a subject which more properly belongs to the legislative 
than Uie executive branch of the Government.' The result 
of the whole is, that Texas had asserted a right to that part 
of New Mexico east of the Rio Grande, which is believed, 
under the :icts of Congress for the annexation and admis- 
sion of Texas into the Union as a State, and under the Con- 
stitution and laws of Texas, to be well founded ; but this 
right had never been reduced to her actual (wssession and 
occupancy. The General Government, possessing exclu- 
sively the war-making power, had the right to take military 
possession of this disputed territory, and, until the Ulle lu it 
was perfected by a treaty of peace, it was their duty to hold 
it, and to establish a temporary military governii ent over it, 
for the preservation of the conquest itself, the safety of our 
army, and Uie security of the conquered inhabitants." 

And also Mr. Polk's annual message of 1849, 
relating to Texas, New Mexico, and California: 

"The existing condition of California, and of that part of 
New Mexico lying west of the Rio Grande, and without the 
limits of Texas, imperiously demand that Congress should, 
at its present session, organize territorial governments over 
them. 

" Upon the exchange of the ratifications of the treaty of 
peace with Mexico of the 30th of May 1 .st, the temporary 
governments which had been established over New Mexico 
and California by our military and naval commanders, by 
virtue of the riglUs of war, cease to derive any obligatory 
force from that source of authority ; and having been ceded 
to the United States, all government and control over them, 
under the authority of Mexico, had ceased to exist. 

" Impressed with the necessity of establishing territorial 
governments over them, 1 recommended the subject to the 
favorable consideration of Congress in mymessase commu- 
nicating the ratified treaty of peace, on the 6th of July last, 
and invoked their action at that session. Congress adjourned 
without making any provision for their government. 

"The inhabitants, by the transfer of their country, had 
become entitled to the benefits of oui laws and Constitution, 
and yet were left without any regularly organized govern- 
ment. 

" Since that time, the very limited power possessed by 
the Executive has been exercised to preserve and protect 
them from the inevitable consequences of a state of anarchy. 
The only government which remained was that established 
by the military authority during the war. Regarding this to 
he a lie facto government, and that, by the presumed consent 
of the inhabitants, itniiahtbe cnntinued temporarily, they 
were advised to conform and submit to it for the short inter- 
vening period before Congress would again assemble and 
could legislate on the subject. The views entertained by the 
Executive on this point are contained in a communication of 
the Secretary of State, dated the 7th of October last, which 
was forwardrd for puljlication." 

The claim of Texas to this territory has found 
no question from Mexican authorities, and has 
found none, except in the United States. This 
territory is her's by every title — it is her's now. 
She owes just debts, and she cannot yield it with- 
out a full compensation. She will make no 
threats against this Government. She will use no 
threatenins: language; but she is under obligations 
to her creditors — nay, to the widows and orphans 
of those who fell in the achievement of her inde- 
pendence — which it would be disgraceful in her to 
forget for a single moment; and she will insist upon 
those rights, as secured to her in the resolutions of 
annexation, and the treaty which followed them. 
I appeal, therefore, to Senators, to come up and 
meet this question fairly, and on its own merits — 
to avoid mixing it up with the question of slavery 
or no slavery — and to decide the question on prin- 
ciples of justice. This is all that Texas asks; and 
this is what she has a right, under the terms of 
annexfition, to expect from the United States. 

Mr. Rusk here gave way to a motion, by Mr. 
Cass, for an adjournment; which was agreed to. 



Thursday, February 28, 1850. 
Mr. RUSK. Mr. President: I completed yes- 
terday, the remarks which I desired to offer, and 



11 



presented the facts which I proposed to present, in 
regard to the third resnhuion offered by the Sena- 
tor from Kenliicl<y. I proceed now, sir, to the 
consideration of his second resolution. I happen 
to be one of those wiio believe that we have airived 
at a much more dangerous crisis than seems gene- 
rally to be supposed. Notwithstanding it is ad- 
mitted that for three years a violent contest has 
been ?oing on, and that during; the whole of that 
time, inflammatory appeals have been made, not to 
the judgment, but to the prejudices of the different 
sections of the Union, still it is contended that the 
Union itself is in no danger, and that it will be 
preserved, let this controversy terminate as it may, 
in the Congress of the United States. I differ in 
opinion from those who are impressed with this 
idea. I have heard too much, here and else- 
where, of the " backing out" of one or the other 
section of this Union. It has been a favorite form 
of expression, used by both sections, that the op- 
posino; section would back out. Now, Mr. Presi- 
dent, I doubt this; and it is my opinion, that any 
considerable number of the American people who 
conceive that their rights have been, or are about to 
be trampled upon, will never "back out." You 
may force them to an unwillin;: acquiescence; you 
may even exteriTiinate them; but 1 think, sir, that 
from the St. Lawrence to the RioGiande, there is 
a spirit existing- in the American bosom, however 
strongly they may be attached to the Union — I 
think there is a spirit existing everywhere, all 
over this broad land, that would never allow the 
people to submit to what they consider a wrong or 
a degradation imposed on them, come from what 
quarter it may. It is a dangerous mistake to sup- 
pose that they will do it; and, in my opinion, it 
IS the wrong spirit in which to approach the ad- 
justment of this question. I regretted, therefore, 
to hear my friend from New Jersey [Mr. Miller] 
talk about his Slate standing until the last gun was 
fired tor the preservation of this Union. You can- 
not preserve this Union by the firing of guns. The 
first gun fired against any State, in her capacity as 
such — you will pardon my expressing the opinion 
— will lie the death-knell of this Union. It was not 
so formed. It was never based upon ihe fears of the 
people. The Constitution, which is the bond of 
Union, is something more than a mere piece of 
parchment; it is the embodiment of a living, vital 
principle; it was intended to exist as such, 
and it must exist as such, protecting the in- 
terests of all. Whenever it ceases to do so, 
from that day forth does this glorious Union vir- 
tually cease to exist. I therefore beg gentlemen 
not to act hastily or imprudently in this matter. 
I know that strong positions have been assumed 
by the legislatures of different States, on opposite 
sides of this question. I hope that we shall yet 
find common ground upon whicii we can all meet 
here. The resolutions of the Senator from Ken- 
tucky are objectionable to me, and 1 cannot vote 
for them, because I do not believe that if they 
are pas.^ed, they will be acceptable to the South. 
But I was glad to see the spirit in which they 
were offered, and to hear the declaration of the 
Senator, that he was not particularly attached to 
them; tliat lie desired discussion on the subject, so 
that the rights of all might be investigated, and 
that he cared not what amendments might l-.e made 
to them. The motives he h.id in view in offering 
those resolutions, 1 commend highly, and 1 hope 



they will animate the bosom of every Senator who 
shall vote upon this question. His great object 
seemed to me to be, to discard sectional issues and 
strife, and to bring about a return to those belter 
days of the Union, when fraternal feeling existed 
all over the land. 

I now proceed to the consideration of the reso- 
lution to which I have referred : 

" 2(1. Rcsohed, That as slavery dne.s not exist by law, and 
is not likely to be introduced into any of the territory ac- 
quired by the United r'lales from the Republic of Mexico, it 
is inexpedient foi Conijress to provide hy law either for its 
introduction into, or exclusion fioni, any part of the faid ter- 
ritory; and that apprnpriate territorial government.-t ouiiht to 
be established by Congress in all the said territory, noi as- 
signed as the boundaries of the proposed State of California, 
without the adoption of any restriction or condition on the 
subject of slavery." 

The Senator was pleased to say that this reso- 
lution contained two great truths— one of law, and 
one of fact. Well, sir, the resolution in its pres- 
ent shape decides the question of law, that slavery 
does not exist in the territories; or, in other words, 
that no one, owning slaves, can carry his property 
there and retain them as such. This is deciding 
and not compromising the question. It is a direct 
decision upon the whole subject-matter of the very 
point in controversy, from the beginning. From 
the start this has been the issue that has divided 
us; it is the question upon which we have split, 
from the commencement of this discussion. It 
has always been urged by the people of the South 
that, as soon as this territory was acquired, they 
had the right, in common with their fellow-citizens 
of the North, to go there with their property, even 
in slaves, and that they were protected in that right 
by the Constitution of the United States, inasmuch 
as the territory was the common property of the 
Union. 

Sir, the first argument with which we were met 
was, that the law of Mexico had abolished slavery 
in those territories; that such a law remained in 
force when we acquired the territories ; and that, 
therefore, slavery was excluded from their limits 
after the acquisition. Now, 1 will not take up the 
time of the Senate, in reading tho.'e laws, but I 
will i-efer to them biiefly. The first is a decree of 
a dictator in Mexico, in the year 1829. That de- 
cree is now asked to be enforced here as law, and 
we are asked, by the terms of this resolution, to 
declare that it is now, notwithstanding the dis- 
avowal of the authority by which it was passed 
by Mexico, the law of the land. Sir, we ought 
to pause in this matter, and recollect that there 
have been a great many decrees made by Mexican 
dictators. But this decree is in direct violation of 
several articles of the Mexican constitution, then 
in existence — the constitution of 1824 ; for in- 
stance, the article declaring that " the Mexican 
nation adopts, for its form of government, a Popu- 
lar Representative, and Ff dei'al Republic." There 
are other matlei-s in relation to this point, by read- 
ing which I will not fatigue the Senate, going on 
to adopt the very same principle, with re<rard to 
the right of the several States to manage their own 
internal institutions and affairs, as is secured in 
the Constitution of the United Stales. Now, sir, 
who will say, that if we were here to-day to in- 
vest the Pre.<ident of the United Slates with su- 
preme political power, and he should undertake to 
issue a decree, abolishing slaver/ throughout the 
Union, it would have the force and effect of law .' 



12 



Yet, such was the operation in Mexico; for her 
constitution is as strino:ent, and as clear and direct 
on this subject, as ours is. But, say gentlemen, 
this law was reaffirmed by the Mexican Congress, 
in 1837. Well, sir, as it was a law directly at 
■variance with the constitution — the fundamental 
law of the land — if they had enacted it a thousand 
times over, having its origin in a violation of the 
constitution, it was a law utterly null and void. 
But we are told, that a constitution, which was 
read by the Senator from Missouri, [Mr. Benton,] 
which was adopted by Mexico in the year 1843, 
absolutely abolished slavery. This may be the 
case; but take up the history of the Mexican Re- 
public, and you will find revolution after revolu- 
tion occurring, and constitution after constitution 
adopted — so that it is with extreme difficulty, amid 
all this confusion, that one, at this day, can ascer- 
tain what the Mexican laws really are. One day 
a plan of government is established, by some suc- 
cessful military leader, only to be overthrown on 
the next, and a new system substituted. The con- 
stitution of 1824 has never been abolished by the 
people themselves, but only overthrown by the 
military leaders; and whenever they have been 
put down, the government has always fallen back 
on that constitution, and gone on under it. 

But suppose this law really did exist, and that, 
on the very day these territories were ceded to the 
United States, it was in full force and effect; does 
it prove anything in favor of the proposition con- 
tended for.' Carry it out and what does it show ? 
The argument is, that this constitution of 1843 
was in existence, and is now in existence, in Cali- 
fornia, and the rest of the territories. If a part of 
it be in existence there, by parity of reasoning, all 
of that constitution is in force in ihose territories; 
and how are we to get clear of it there ? Only by 
the means pointed out in the Constitution itself — 
by an alteration of it; and we of the slaveholding 
States are asked to agree to this, and to forsake 
the ground upon which we stand, and which we 
think invulnerable. In negotiating the very treaty 
by which we acquired this territory, the Mexi- 
cans asked that the laws in regard to the exclusion 
of slavery in the territories, should remain in force, 
and we refused to insert such a condition. The 
Supreme Court of the United States, quoted so 
often in regard to its decisions on these points of 
law, declares that all political laws, as a matter of 
course, cease to operate as soon as the jurisdiction 
passes from one sovereignty to another. And is 
this not a political law.' and can the decision of 
the Supreme Court be tortured to mean anything 
more or less than this — that laws which refer only 
to contracts and rights between individuals on the 
soil, are confirmed and continue to operate under 
the transfer of sovereignty ? Is not such the case.' 
If so, admit tlie whole argument, and say ihat, by 
force of law in Mexico, slavery is abolished; and 
then, instead of coming to the point where a direct 
conclusion can be made. Senators have only reached 
the beginning; for we contend that the moment 
this territory came under our jurisdiction, this law, 
if it did exist before, ceased to operate. We have 
shown our sincerity in this belief, by agreeing to 
submit the matter to the Supreme Court. Wliat 
objection could there be to that tribunal .' It stands 
as high as any other judical tribunal in the world; 
and when the chance was, that peace and quiet 
might be restored to the land by its decision, was 



it not desirable ? This was what the South came 
forward and offered to do. 

But I have not quite disposed of this subject of 
the Mexican law; and I will add a few words in 
respect to slavery in Mexico, as connected with it. 
Mexico is held up as a model for us in our action 
touching this institution, and demagogues who 
have said so much on the subject, have pointed 
her out as a bright example for us to follow. If 
her laws, in relation to the abolition of slavery, 
are now in force in the ceded territories, then all 
her laws on the subject of bondage are. There 
has never been much of African slavery in Mexico, 
and there is a very good and substantial reason 
for it, founded, not on her superior regarJ for the 
rights of man, but on the peculiarity of her laws. 

Slavery is an institution of the civil law; and 
this law, from the beginning, was paramount in 
Spain, and of course in Mexico, as a Spanish col- 
ony. All our notions on the subject are derived 
from the civil law; slavery being first introduced 
from civil law into common law countries; and to 
that law we refer in matters of slavery. One of 
the principles of this law, which is now in full 
force in Mexico, recognizes peonage; and if the 
law abolishing slavery exist in the acquired terri- 
tory, it must be remembered that the law which 
authorizes the peonage system, exists there 
also. Slavery, according to the civil law, is based 
on the ground of a debt due from the slave to his 
master; as, when he had been taken in war, in re- 
turn for saving his life, he was obliged to be the 
slave of his owner, so long as his life lasted. This 
principle is farther carried out; and in Mexico, at 
this moment, if an individual owes to another a 
dollar, he becomes virtually his property — he and 
his family — until the amount is paid; and he can 
be brought before any alcalde, and compelled to 
yield service. This is the kind of slavery which 
has existed in Mexico, and which has obviated 
the necessity, if not caused the abolition, of Afri- 
can slavery. On this subject I speak what I know, 
for I have stood by and seen the law declared and 
carried into execution by the alcalde. The moment 
an individual fails to pay a debt, due to another, 
that moment he and his family become the servants 
of the creditor until the debt is paid, which may 
be forever; because the creditor charges the debtor 
what he pleases for what he eats and wears, and 
thus can always keep him in his debt. Ifan escape . 
is attempted, the laws aid the creditor in the arrest 
and restoration to him of the fugitive debtor. 
This kind of slavery is far better for the master, 
but infinitely worse for the servant, than the system 
of African slavery as it exists in this country. 

Here the owner of a slave is bound to furnish 
him with raiment, and food — to take care of him 
when he is sick; and when age or disease has 
rendered him totally useless, he is required by the 
laws of every State in this Union, where the insti- 
tution exists, to take care of, and provide for, him. 
But under the system of peonage, no such obliga- 
tions are imposed on the master; and if gentle- 
men prefer that kind of slavery to the slavery that 
exists in this country, I am ready to give them all 
the credit due their choice. That it is a great deal 
better for the master, there can be no doubt; be- 
cause the moment a slave, from age or disease, or 
any other course, becomes worthless, he can throw 
him on the public for support. It is not so, as all 
are aware, with the slave-owner in this country. 



13 



But we contend — and, as I think, fairly — that 
this matter should be regulated in this way: This 
territory lias been acquired by the Government of 
the United States; and to whom does that Gov- 
ernment belong ' Whose Government is it that in 
the first place acquires this property? It is the 
Government of the people, and the Government of 
the States of this Union. The property has been 
required by the joint effort of all the States. The 
Government in prosecuting the late war with Mex- 
ico, called upon Massachusetts and upon Texas for 
troops — as it had a ri»ht to, and did, call upon every 
State of the Confederacy to furnish men to go and 
fight its battles. It took out of the Treasury funds 
raised by duties imposed on every citizen and all the 
States — slnvtholiling as well as non-slavei)olding — 
of this Union, to defray the expenses of the war. 
All were equal in the fight; all stood on an equality 
so far as furnishing the men for the armies was 
concerned; all were on a perfect equality, so far as 
paying the expenses of the war was concerned; all 
were perfectly equal, the slaveholding and non- 
slaveholding States, in these matters; and these 
black spots, about which we have heard so much, 
were not perceived then They were not per- 
ceived when the treaty of peace was sanctioned by 
the Senate, by which all this property was ac- 
quired. Now, we contend that the citizens of the 
slaveholding States havean equal share in the prop- 
erty thus acquired, and have a right to go there 
with their property. To say that a man may go 
there as his right, and not laj^e his property with 
him, is, in fact, to confer no right at all. It is a 
barren right, and therefore amounts to nothing at 
all. But, say gentlemen, the possession of such 
property is a great sin. There was no such talk 
at the formation of the Con.'titution. Gentlemen 
cannot reconcile it to their conscience, as they tell 
us, to establish slavery in California. This is a sort 
of figure of speech. You do not establish slavery 
by permitting it to go anywhere. If all the slaves 
in the United States were permitted to go to these 
territories, is it the establishment of slavery any- 
where ? Can it fairly be called the establishment 
of slavery.' To establish slavery certainly means 
to convert a free man into a slave, and nothing 
else. It can mean but that. The truth is, that 
this cry about the establishment of slavery, so much 
harped upon as an outrage upon the sense of the 
civilized world, and as a sin in the sight of God, 
which I have often heard, and sometimes even in 
this chamber, all refers to a matter whicli took 
place a long time ago, and before this Constitution 
had its existence. At that time, all hands were 
about equally involved in the crime, if crime it be. 
All the sections of this country took about an equal 
share in its establishment- I do not know, for I 
was not here then, but I have heard it said, that 
northern ships, manned by northern sailors, 
brought the slaves into this country. The estab- 
lishment of slavery was, therefore, participated in 
by all the North as well as the South; and it seems 
to me then, if we do repent over the sins of our 
fathers, we ought to do it without such loud lam- 
entations, the more especially when those lamen- 
tations are offensive to one portion of the Union, 
that does not consider slavery as either a political 
or moral evil. I happen to be just one of that kind 
of men. I believe that the slaves in the South, 
take them all together, are in a much better con- 
dition than they would be in a state of servitude 



in the country from which they were brought. I 
have not been to that quarter of the world, and 
will not absolutely assert this to be the fact; but 
this much 1 do know, that they are infinitely better 
off" than the free negroes whom I have seen at the 
North. They are an offcast, despised, and degraded 
race among you. You tell them they are free, but 
you give them none of the privileges of freedom. 
They fill your poor-housesand your penitentiaries, 
and swell largely your revolting statistics of crime. 
I repeat, that the negroes of the South, as a class, 
are immeasurably better off than are the free ne- 
groes of the North. 

It is clear you do not establish slavery by re- 
moving the slave; that you do not make a slave; but 
it is said you are extending the political rights of 
the South. How so ? Will they not be repre- 
sented, if they are confined to the States where 
they are, just as much as when they are removed 
to California or New Mexico? It is only extend- 
ing the area over which they go; but it does not 
increase their numbers. But 1 have been told, 
that the institution must be confined to narrow 
bounds, in order to prevent its increase. What 
does this argument amount to ? Is it creditable to 
human nature ? You must so confine this unhappy 
race — you must so cut them off from every com- 
fort, so disregard them as human beings, as to 
check the natural increase of population. If you 
wish to get clear of them , take them out and shoot 
them, I beseech you, because then they will die 
immediately; but do not punish them with a liv- 
ing death, which is to last for generations. We 
claim this common right, and you seek to deny it 
to us, on the ground that it is a sin; and you con- 
sider this no insult — no degradation — to those who 
possess slaves. Let us reason calmly — let us for- 
get, for a single moment, the storm you have 
raised, and reflect what it is your duty to do, under 
the existing circumstances. Sir, if two Indiana 
were to hunt in common, and take game, and a 
dispute were to arise, and one, because he hap- 
pened to be larger than the other, or because he 
happened to have some accidental advantage, 
should attempt to seize the whole, the sense of 
justice of both would revolt at the proposition. 

Under such a state of things, is it at all aston- 
ishing that there should be excitement? And I 
ask gentlemen, who come here, and tell us that 
slavery does not exist by law in these territories, 
to bring forward some measure of compromise. 
Shall we run the risk of the consequences that 
may, and I believe will, follow from this invidious 
and unequal legislation • 

Sir, so far as 1 am concerned, since the very 
commencement of this difficulty, I have seen mis- 
chief in it. I have been very anxious that it 
should be settled, and settled upon almost any 
terms that should allow the Representatives of the 
slaveholding and non-slaveholding States to meet 
here, as our fathers did, after the formation of the 
Constitution, as equals, and to feel that we are so. 

What is it that you desire ? You seek to embody 
in a legislative enactment of this Government — the 
constitutional power of which has been denied, 
and I have not yet heard the argument of the hon- 
orable Senator from Michigan successfully an- 
swered — you are seeking, I say, to embody certain 
sentiments — you say, of righteousness, but I say 
sickly sentiments. We differ in opinion on that 
subject. You are seeking to adopt a sentiment — a 



14 



mere sentiment. How did that sentiment originate? 
It was introduced as a political hobby. It com- 
menced with a distinguished gentleman — I do not 
know whether he was particularly distinguished 
before the introduction of that hobby, but he has 
been so since — a distinguished member of the 
House of Representatives, before we had an acre 
of land to divide. Who started it? — svheredid it 
come from? Sir, it has been continued in every 
shape and form in which it could be brought up. 
He was not permitted to enjoy the eclat of the 
movement alone. It is true, he was the first to 
saddle and bridle the animal, bu he was not |ier- 
mitted to ride it alone; there were thousands who 
mounted it with him. In the elections for sheriff, 
for constable, for members of Congress, and for 
Senators, the subject was made a ground of politi- 
cal advancement. For this 1 have the authority 
of a Senator from New Hampshire, [Mr. Hale;] 
and there was an aspirant for the Presidency, 
whose friends mounted him, booted and spurred, 
upon the same animal. Sir, this subject is one 
that has been productive of nothing but excitement 
and bitterness of feeling — ay, madness — from the 
time it originated; and it is my conviction it will 
continue to be so, until it is finally disposed of. 
What is all this discussion to end in ? After Cali- 
fornia is admitted into the Union — next year, if 
she chooses — she may establish slavery within 
her borders; she may, at any future time, by al- 
tering the provisions of her constitution, allow 
slave property to be carried there. All this is true; 
and yet gentlemen from the North insist, with a 
pertinacity almost unaccountable, that a paltry 
abstraction shall be conceded to them. 

I ask Senators to look at this subject uninflu- 
enced by prejudices, and in a spirit of candor. We 
of the South are willing to settle the question on 
just principles now, and we always have been will- 
ing thus to settle it. It was upon the motion of 
a Senator from a slave-holding State — now no 
longer here — the Secretary of State at present — 
that a compromise bill was reported to the Senate, 
asking for the reference of the entire matter to the 
Supreme Court. The bill passed here, and was 
rejected in the House of Representatives. This 
was not all. The next proposition for an adjust- 
ment came from a Senator from a non-slavehold- 
ing State. The Senator from Illinois — not now in 
his seat, [Mr. Douglas] — actuated by the most 
pure and patriotic motives to make an endeavor 
to settle this whole difficulty — came forward and 
offered what at once would have settled this entire 
question — the Missouri compromise. The South 
met it in this chamber, and passed it; but it was re- 
jected by the non-slaveholding States in the other 
House. Another Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. 
Walker] came forward with another proposition 
still more liberal in its terms, conceding much 
more than the North had a right to ask or demand. 
That measure was adopted in this chamber; yet 
the free States rejected it in the other House; and 
now, sir, we find ourselves just as far from an ad- 
justment of the pending dispute, as we were at the 
beginning of the controversy. It is time, Mr. 
President, that upon this subject we pause and re- 
flect. 

We of the South ask nothing but what is right ; 
and can you expect us to submit to anything that is 
wrong ? Can you, sir, abrogate the provisions of 
the Constitution, which guaranties to the citizens of 



every State in this Confederacy, equal rights and 
privileges, by denying to us the exercise of those 
rights, and demanding that we shall submit to 
wrong ? Can you suppose for a moment that such 
palpable wrong as this will be submitted to ? If 
we were to yield what we consider our just consti- 
tutional rights, growing out of the free principles 
in which our Government is founded, and the per- 
fect equality of the Stales, guarantied when that 
Government was formed, and acquiesce quietly in 
the terms which you might see fit to dictate to us, 
you would never respect us any more. I pray 
God, sir, that no such alternative as that of sub- 
mission to encroachments on our rights, will be 
attempted to be forced upon us; that, in order that 
this Union may be preserved. Senators will pause 
and reflect before they proceed to extremities; and 
that, by due consideration of the provisions of our 
common Constitution, their minds may become 
infused with the spirit which caused such fraternal 
action on the part of those who framed that sacred 
instrument; and then, coming forward and deliber- 
ating upon the proposition offered by the Senator 
from Kentucky — from Tetmessee — or any other 
that may be presented, they may unite in forming 
some general plan that will settle at once, and for- 
ever, the vexatiousquestions that are now in issue 
between the two great sections of the Confederacy. 

This great question, sir, of slavery has been ar- 
gued so fully and ably by Senators more able to do 
it justice than I can possibly be, that I shall not, 
on the present occasion, go any farther into the 
discussion of it. I may, sir, in what I have al- 
ready said, have spoken somewhat earnestly. If 
I have done so, sir, it has been with no disposition 
whatever to awaken unkind or bitter feelings, 
either in the hearts of Senators here, or of any 
portion of the people of this country elsewhere. 
In what I may have said and done, sir, I have acted 
under what appeared to me to be the dictates of a 
solemn sense of duty, under the circumstances in 
which I am placed — a sacred duty to the Constitu- 
tion which I am sworn to support — a sacred duty 
which I owe to the slave-holding State which I 
have the honor to represent; and therefore, actuated 
as I am solely by a strict sense of the obligations 
imposed on me as a Senator in this chamber, I 
spurn with indignation any charge that I am in 
favor or desirous of the dissolution of the Union, 
because I thus candidly state what I consider to be 
the aggressions of the North upon the South, and 
the light in which these aggressions are viewed by 
us. 

If, sir, I have any political attachment deeper in 
its feeling and extent than another, it is love to 
this Union. Sir, I, in common with my constit- 
uents, have recently given unmistakable evidence 
of our devotion to, and attachment for, this Union. 
I am attached to life by as many strong ties as bind 
any one in existence; but if I know myself — if 
I could to-day preserve this Union in the spirit in 
which it was formed — and, more than that, if I 
could preserve it with the fraternal feeling which 
should animate the breast of every American free- 
man in the land, and without which the Union 
would be worthless — I would meet death in any 
form in which it might be presented, and in doing 
so, would feel that I was conferring upon my chil- 
dren, and upon the human family at large, the 
greatest legacy that could descend to them on this 
side of the grave. 



